Environmental analysis of Turkey’s aggregated and sector-level CO2 emissions

Abstract

Turkey’s ecological footprint has recently been increasing, while its biocapacity has been decreasing. Furthermore, the country’s CO2 emissions have been rising substantially in recent decades. Therefore, this study aims to identify the factors that are changing the CO2 emissions in Turkey, not only at the aggregated level but also for the sectors with the highest increases in CO2 emissions, namely, electricity and heat production. Research into the aggregated CO2 emissions and the sector-level analysis covered the period 1990–2017. The Shapley decomposition method was utilized, and the impacts of five factors, namely, scale effect, migration effect, population, energy intensity, and carbon intensity, were considered to examine the changes in total CO2 emissions. Regarding the analysis of the electricity and heat production sectors, the roles of four factors, namely, income effect, electricity intensity, fuel structure, and pollution coefficient, were investigated by using the same decomposition approach. The results showed that the scale effect is the primary driver of acceleration of total CO2 emissions in Turkey; population, migration, and carbon intensity effects follow the scale effect in this respect. Energy intensity significantly decreases Turkey’s total emissions. For the electricity and heat production sectors, the Shapley decomposition results showed that the income effect, electricity intensity, and fuel structure increase the country’s CO2 emissions rapidly. The pollution coefficient was the only factor that decreased CO2 in these sectors in the studied period. This study reveals that Turkey is still deficient in terms of green development processes, which are essential for a sustainable future.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Graph 1
Graph 2
Graph 3

Data availability

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

References

  1. Akbostanci E, Tunç Gİ, Aşık ST (2009) A decomposition analysis of cO2 emissions from energy use: Turkish case. Energy Policy 37(2009):4689–4699

    Google Scholar 

  2. Akbostanci E, Tunç Gİ, Aşık ST (2011) CO2 emissions of Turkish manufacturing industry: a decomposition analysis. Appl Energy 88(2011):2273–2278

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Akbostanci E, Tunç Gİ, Aşık ST (2018) Drivers of fuel based carbon dioxide emissions: the case of Turkey. Renew Sust Energ Rev 81(2):2599–2608

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Akyürek Z (2020) LMDI decomposition analysis of energy consumption of Turkish manufacturing industry: 2005-2014. Energy Effic 13(2020):649–663

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Albrecht J, Francois D, Schoors K (2002) A Shapley decomposition of carbon emissions without residuals. Energy Policy 30(2002):727–736

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Ang BW, Liu LF, Chew EP (2003) Perfect decomposition techniques in energy and environmental analysis. Energy Policy 31(2003):1561–1566

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Ari I, Aydin L (2019) Türkiye’de yerel iklim değişikliği eylem planlarının hazırlanması ve etkin uygulanması için öneriler (recommendations for the preparation and effective implementation of local climate change action plans in Turkey). Iğdır Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi (Iğdır University, Journal of Social Sciences), Ek sayı (supplement), 395-414

  8. Ari I, Isik M, Sarica K (2020) Driving forces of Turkey’s transportation sector CO2 emissions: an LMDI approach. Transp Policy 97(2020):210–219

    Google Scholar 

  9. Berk I, Torun E (2019) Testing merit-order effect in Turkey’s electricity market: the effect of wind penetration on day-ahead electricity prices. Akdeniz İİBF J 19(1):133–156

    Google Scholar 

  10. Büke T, Köne AÇ (2019) Factor analysis of projected carbon dioxide emissions according to the IPCC based sustainable emission scenario in Turkey. Renew Energy 133(2019):914–918

    Google Scholar 

  11. Chontanawat J, Wiboonchutikula P, Buddhivanich A (2020) Decomposition analysis of the carbon emissions of the manufacturing and industrial sector in Thailand. Energies 13:798

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Gao J, Tian M (2016) Analysis of over-consumption of natural resources and the ecological trade deficit in China based on ecological footprints. Ecol Indic 61(2):899–904

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Geng Y, Pan H, Zhuang M, Wu F, Dong H (2019) Emergy-based ecological footprint analysis for a mega-city: the dynamic changes of Shanghai. J Clean Prod 210:552–562

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Global Covenant of Mayors (2020) Why cities matter?  http://www.globalcovenantofmayors.org/. Access date: May 2020

  15. Global Footprint Network (2020) Advancing the science of sustainability. Ecological footprints and reserves. Retrieved from https://www.footprintnetwork.org/. Access date: January 2020

  16. International Energy Agency (2020). Retrieved from https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/?country=WORLD&fuel=CO2%20emissions&indicator=CO2%20emissions%20by%20energy%20source . Access date: January, 2020

  17. Kumbaroğlu G (2011) A sectoral decomposition analysis of Turkish CO2 emissions over 1990-2007. Energy 36(5):2419–2433

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Lise W (2006) Decomposition of CO2 emissions over 1980-2003 in Turkey. Energy Policy 34(14):1841–1852

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Rugani B, Roviani D, Hild P, Schmitt B, Benetto E (2014) Ecological deficit and use of natural capital in Luxembourg from 1995 to 2009. Sci Total Environ 468–469:292–301

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Rüstemoğlu H (2016) Ekonomik büyümenin çevresel maliyeti: Türkiye ve İran ölçeğinde CO2 emisyonlarinin belirleyicileri (environmental cost of economic growth: the determinants of CO2 emissions in Iran and Turkey). ITOBIAD 5:2151–2168

    Google Scholar 

  21. Rüstemoğlu H (2019) Factors affecting Germany’s green development over 1990-2015: a comprehensive environmental analysis. Environ Sci Pollut Res 26:6636–6651

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. TUIK (2020) 1990–2017 yılları arası sektörlere göre Türkiye ekonomisi (Sectoral distribution of Turkey’s economy over 1990–2017). Retrieved from https://www.turkstat.gov.tr/Start.do . Access date: January 2020

  23. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (2020) Greenhouse gas inventory data. Retrieved from http://unfccc.int/ghg_data/items/3800.php. Access date: January 2020

  24. Wackernagel M, Kitzes J, Moran D, Goldfinger S, Thomas M (2006) The ecological footprint of cities and regions: comparing resource availability with resource demand. Environ Urban 18(1):103–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Wobedo A (2019) Decomposing the decoupling of road-based traffic emissions and economic growth: regional disparities between the national and city-level in Germany during 1999–2013. Student Paper, Lund University, School of Economics and Management

  26. World Bank (2020) World development indicators. Retrieved from http://databank.worldbank.org/data/home.aspx. Access date: January, 2020

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

This research article has been conducted by a single author. Thus, every section of it has been written by the author. All responsibilities belong to the author, himself.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hasan Rüstemoğlu.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interests

The author declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

Not applicable

Consent to participate

Not applicable

Consent to publish

Not applicable

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Responsible Editor: Philippe Garrigues

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rüstemoğlu, H. Environmental analysis of Turkey’s aggregated and sector-level CO2 emissions. Environ Sci Pollut Res (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-11895-6

Download citation

Keywords

  • Electricity and heat production
  • CO2 emissions
  • Turkey
  • Shapley decomposition technique
  • decomposition analysis